My WomensWallStreet.com article today, about the Federal Flight Deck Officers (FFDO) program, is creating a controversy I did not expect. Pilots are sending me emails of support; air marshals are sending me angry ones. This newest installment called, “Annie Get Your Gun” is part of an ongoing series I write for the webzine about aviation security. In this article, I argue that the TSA is responsible for mismanaging the FFDO program.

I also make a case for the fact that TSA is responsible for manipulating media outlets in spinning the FFDO program so it seems controversial when it’s not:

“Every major pilot association in America supports the program. An overwhelming 85 percent of 100,000 eligible pilots have expressed interest in eventually flying armed (according to various pilot association polls). And yet today, less that 10% of those pilots are FFDOs. Why? For four years now, the pilots have pointed the finger at the TSA for the program’s lack of success. Meanwhile, the TSA had blamed the pilots. Finally, after years of the blame game, it’s the numbers that reveal the truth. This from the website of the 40,000 member Allied Pilots Security Alliance:

* Cost to protect 5% of flights with Air Marshals: $688 million for one year
* Cost to protect 97% of flights with trained, armed pilots: $11 million a year

So there you have it. A successful FFDO program – one where a phenomenal 97% of all US flights could have an armed pilot (sworn to perform federal law enforcement duties while in flight) on board – would cost taxpayers a paltry $11 million a year. That’s 1/63rd of the cost of the TSA’s budget this year for putting only 2,000 Air Marshals in the air. Instead of looking to save money and protect the maximum number of flights, the TSA, which overseas the Federal Air Marshal Service and its $700 million annual operating budget, acts as if it’s looking to avoid scrutiny.”

While pilots are discussing the “spot on” nature of the article on message boards, I’m getting flooded by emails from angry air marshals who seem to think my support of the FFDO program means my betrayal of the air marshals, which is absurd. The air marshal program is an excellent and necessary layer of aviation security. But how the program is managed (ie: mismanaged) and by whom, continues to be another story.

Hands down, it’s the bureaucratic bloat I object to — and I think air marshals and citizens alike should object to this too. Why it costs US taxpayers $350,000 to put an air marshal in the air — a figure that has more than tripled (from $109,000) in less than five years — needs to be made clear by the TSA. (air marshal salaries, that average approximately $75,000 a year, haven’t changed.)

I suggest the angry rank-and-file air marshals start asking these questions of their bosses in their field offices — their SACs [Special Agent-in-Charge] and their ASACs [Assistant Special Agent-in-Charge] and their ATSACs [Assistant to the Special Agent-in-Charge] — all of whom are making six figure salaries and of whom there are so many. Perhaps they could explain the ballooning budgets and the unbridled secrecy programs.

Secret government budgets are never a good sign for democracy. Email your Congressperson and demand the Federal Air Marshal Service budget breakdowns — currently classified — be made transparent.

Share This Article